This article explores the scope and application of Chester v Afshar following Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board and more recent decisions that have followed Montgomery. It will attempt to address residual confusion concerning the impact of the decision in Chester and argue that inappropriate recourse to Chester is the source of much of the confusion surrounding causation and risk disclosure. Following the recent decisions in Duce v Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust and Diamond v Royal Devon & Exeter NHSFT this article argues that far from being an exceptional case Chester is a very ordinary case and not the special solution to tricky causation problems
